Hindawi

Advances in Civil Engineering

Volume 2019, Article ID 3689097, 10 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/3689097

Research Article
Seepage Analysis of a Multilayer Waste Slope considering the
Spatial and Temporal Domains of Permeability

Rong Yang ,1 Zengguang Xu ,2 and Junrui Chai 2

1
Ph.D. Student, State Key Laboratory Base of Eco-hydraulic Engineering in Arid Area, Xi’an University of Technology,
Xi’an 710048, China
2
Professor, State Key Laboratory Base of Eco-hydraulic Engineering in Arid Area,
Xi’an University of Technology, Xi’an 710048, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Rong Yang; yangrongxaut123@163.com

Received 9 May 2019; Revised 25 July 2019; Accepted 2 August 2019; Published 25 August 2019

Academic Editor: Giovanni Biondi

Copyright © 2019 Rong Yang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

Landfilled municipal solid waste has evident heterogeneity, and clogging of the drainage layer can easily happen during operation
of the landfill. These two factors significantly influence the distribution of leachate in a landfill. Herein, the distribution of waste
permeability in the spatial and temporal domains was analyzed. Then, changes to the drainage-layer permeability in the temporal
domain were fitted to these data. A simple model of multilayer waste slope was established combining the finite element software
and a user subroutine. Herewith, changes of permeability in the waste and drainage layers were simulated, such that the
heterogeneity of waste and the process of clogging of the drainage layer could be simulated. Then, the leachate distributions and
transport conditions of nine schemes for landfill were analyzed. The results indicated that the distribution curve of waste-saturated
permeability follows a logarithmic relation in the vertical direction, and the distribution curve of fresh-waste-saturated per-
meability follows a polynomial relation in time. After each landfill is worked for a few years, the drainage layer always encounters
clogging problems of some kind and its permeability decreases by one to five orders of magnitude. Through numerical models, the
simulation results of the permeability distribution in the spatial and temporal domains were found satisfactory. When the
permeability distributions were layered in the buried depth, pore pressures and leachate levels are smaller than the logarithmic
distributions. During the process of degradation, the pore pressures and leachate levels are increased slightly under the con-
sideration of the polynomial distribution of waste permeability in time. With clogging of the permeability of the drainage layer, the
pore pressures and leachate levels of landfill were found to be increasing gradually. To obtain results closer to that of actual
situations, corresponding models should be established and analyzed based on a range of permeability, waste degradation rate, and
degree of clogging.

1. Introduction The factors influencing the waste permeability include

With the urban development, the output of municipal solid
waste (MSW) increases dramatically. The main method for
disposal of MSW is landfill. The main problem with landfill
is that the leachate level gets too high, which threatens the
slope stability of the landfill [1–3]. Thus, it is important to
analyze the seepage from landfills. Waste and drainage layer
hydraulic conductivities have great effect on the leachate
level of a landfill, and they have the characteristics of het-
erogeneity and unsteadiness.
their physical composition, content, pressure, density, and
particle size distribution [4–8]. Some domestic and overseas
experts have studied permeability by both laboratory and
field tests [9–13]. Considering operability and cost, labo-
ratory tests are the most commonly used methods to
measure permeability. According to statistics, the perme-
ability of landfilled MSW displayed a decreasing trend with
the increase of the burying depth. The permeability gradually
stabilized in the range of 1.0 × 10− 3 m/s to 5.0 × 10− 10 m/s
[14–16], and the value at the deep end of the landfill is very
2 Advances in Civil Engineering
small. Due to the MSW being older, the degradation degree
is higher, and there is more pressure present at the deep end
of the landfill [17]. Based on the laboratory test, field
pumping test, formula for forecasting method, and so on, the
space distributions of MSW hydraulic conductivity are
shown in Figure 1 [18, 19]. Laboratory testing of a landfill
was carried out by Jie et al. [20], concluding that the per-
meability decreases with time and tends to become stable
after seven days. By the constant-head test method, the
infiltration characteristics of fresh waste with different ratios
were studied and the relationships among the permeability,
density, and time buried were obtained [17]. These con-
firmed the results reported by Jie et al. [20]. Wang [21] tested
the relationship between permeability of landfill and waste
degradation time. The infiltration characteristics of 31 fresh
waste samples with high organic contents were then ana-
lyzed, and the changes in permeability and density along
with compressive strain were determined [22]. This provides
a reference for permeability prediction and seepage calcu-
lation for similar MSW landfills.
In addition to the distribution of the MSW perme-
ability, the permeability of the drainage layer changes in the
temporal domain. In the process of landfill operation, the
landfill drainage system will have different degrees of
clogging, resulting in a gradual decrease in the permeability
coefficient and an increase in the leachate water level. A
two-dimensional model was established by Cooke and
Rowe [23] to analyze the clogging problem of landfill
leachate drainage systems. Through large-scale experi-
mental research, it was found that biological and mineral
solids are the causes of drainage pipe clogging [24]. The
problem of clogging of the waste drainage layer of different
fillers was analyzed through tests by Bazienė et al. [25], and
the results indicated that the main substances causing the
decrease of permeability were calcium, silicon, and iron
compounds. Rowe and Yu [26] analyzed the problem of
clogging in landfills by establishing a bioclogging model.
Rowe and Yu [27] used the BioClog model to analyze the
clogging of landfill leachate flowing through gravel drains.
With extended durations of landfill operation, the drain
clogs due to physical, chemical, and biological activities
[28, 29], that is, the permeability of the drainage layer
decreases gradually with waste degradation time. The initial
permeability of the drainage layer should not be below
1.0 × 10− 3 m/s in China. In terms of testing drainage-layer
clogging, the permeability of a landfill in America de-
creased from 4.2 × 10− 4 m/s to 3.1 × 10− 8 m/s after six years
of operation [30], based on the research data analysis. The
study by Bouchez et al. [31] indicated that the main drain
clogged by more than 80%. It was shown by statistical
analysis that the permeability of drains varied with test
methods [32]. After 250− 4380 days of operation, the per-
meability of drainage layer declined by one to two orders of
magnitude, with a minimum value of 1.0 × 10− 9 m/s.
The leachate level of MSW landfill is very high due to
high water content, organic degradation, and rainfall.
Generally, the leachate level of landfill form contains main
leachate level, perched leachate level, and leachate level of
drainage layer. When the drainage layer is clogging, it
1.0E – 01
Saturated permeability of MSW k0 (m/s)
1.0E – 02
1.0E – 03
1.0E – 04
1.0E – 05
1.0E – 06
1.0E – 07
0 5 10 15 20 25
Depth H (m)
Field testing data
Data predicted by Campbell formula
Fitting curve of field testing data
Lab test result of manmade MSW
Lab test result of Qizishan MSW
Figure 1: Saturated permeability distribution of Qizishan landfill
in the spatial domain [18, 19].
gathers a large number of leachate and the leachate level of
the drainage layer rises to the main leachate level [33]. In
terms of field monitoring, pore pressures are measured
with an osmometer, and the leachate level and in-
termediate-layer position are analyzed. Main leachate and
perched levels exist in Qizishan landfill, and a 30 cm thick
intermediate layer exists at a depth of 10 m [34, 35]. He [36]
monitored the leachate level of Xi’an Jiangcungou landfill
and established that 2− 6 m deep multilayer leachate levels
existed in the landfill. In terms of numerical analysis, the
seepage of the MSW landfill was simulated by two-di-
mensional numerical simulation [15, 37, 38]. Qiu et al. [19]
studied leachate transport in landfill, considering various
rainfall patterns. During the above researches, each layer of
waste permeability is simplified into a constant and the
variation of the permeability of drainage layer with waste
degradation time is not considered. In fact, waste per-
meability and depth perform the functional relationship
and drainage layer is clogging with increasing waste deg-
radation time.
Although the changes to waste infiltration character-
istics in the spatial and temporal domains were
researched on test, there was relatively less research in
numerical calculation, especially regarding the perme-
ability of the waste and drainage layers in the temporal
domain. Based on the above research, a method was
proposed to simulate changes to the permeability of waste
and drainage layers in the spatial and temporal domains.
The pore pressures and leachate levels were then
analyzed.
2. Permeability Distribution of Landfill
Based on the physical composition, unit weight, and age of
MSW, the space and time distribution curves of MSW
permeability were gained from relevant references
Advances in Civil Engineering 3

1E + 00 1.0E + 00
Saturated permeability of MSW

distribution of drainage layer

1E – 01 1.0E – 01

Saturated permeability
1E – 02 1.0E – 02
k0 (m/h)

kd (m/h)
1E – 03 1.0E – 03
1E – 04 1.0E – 04
1E – 05 1.0E – 05
1E – 06 1.0E – 06
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 50 100 150 200 250
Depth H (m) Degradation age t (d)
Maximum value Kd1 (a portion clogging)
Medium value
Kd2 (no clogging)
Minimum value
Kd3 (clogging process)
Figure 2: Initial saturated permeability distribution of MSW in the
spatial domain [14]. Figure 4: Saturated permeability distribution of drainage layer in
the temporal domain [38].

1.1
minimum value : lg k0 � 3600 × 􏼒− 4.1589 − 1.2381
1.0
Relative permeability ratio

0.9
0.8 × 10− 1 H + 3.3109 × 10− 5 H2 (1)
0.7
kt/k0

0.6 + 1.0409 × 10− 5 H3 􏼓,

0.5
0.4
0.3
medium value : lg k0 � 3600 × 􏼒 − 3.7477 − 1.1207
0.2
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 × 10− 1 H + 4.5258 × 10− 4 H2 (2)
Waste degradation time t (month)
+ 3.5120 × 10− 6 H3 􏼓,
Testing data (e = 2.2)
Fitting curve of testing data (e = 2.2)
Testing data (e = 1.7) maximum value : lg k0 � 3600 × 􏼒 − 3.3685 − 8.78
Fitting curve of testing data (e = 1.7)
Figure 3: Saturated hydraulic conductivity distribution of MSW in × 10− 2 H − 2.5277 × 10− 5 H2 (3)
the temporal domain [21].
+ 8.0405 × 10− 6 H3 􏼓,

(Figures 2 and 3) [14, 21]. The initial saturated perme- kt

e � 2.2 : � 0.6615 × e(− 0.0198t)
ability ranged from 1.0 × 10− 3 m/s to 1.0 × 10− 10 m/s within k0 (4)
60 m depth, and its rate gradually decreased with the + 0.3374, 2
R � 99%,
increase of the depth. The relationships between perme-
ability and depth were shown in equations (1)− (3). Based kt
on the permeability test about two different void ratios (e), e � 1.7 : � 0.6753 × e(− 0.0201t)
the relation curves between permeability and waste k0 (5)
2
degradation time are shown in Figure 3 and equations (4) + 0.3223, R � 98%,
and (5). According to the research by Rowe et al. [38], the
permeability of the drainage layer declined from kd3 � 3600 × 10− 0.012t/24− 3.997 , t ≥ 150 h.
3.6 × 10− 1 m/h to 3.6 × 10− 6 m/h in 0− 250 d. Three as-
sumptions were made about changes of the permeability (6)
of drainage layers, as shown in Figure 4. The medium
permeability and void ratio of the waste and similar ranges 3. Model and Permeability Simulation
of permeability of drainage layer, before and after clog-
ging, were analyzed in the manuscript. The permeability 3.1. Calculation Sketch. A multilayer waste slope was se-
distributions of equations (2), (5), and (6) are taken to lected for simulation. The calculation sketch is shown in
analyze seepage of landfill: Figure 5. The slope ratio is 1 : 3, and the slope height is
4 Advances in Civil Engineering
95.5 m
W1
31.5m
M S5
W2
W3
20 m
D F
10m 190m
Figure 5: Calculation sketch of the model.
31.5 m. The initial ground water is located in the slope toe.
W1, W2, and W3 are the waste in the first, second, and third
layer, respectively. F indicates the foundation, and M is the
middle layer. Here, D is the drainage layer, and its height and
initial permeability are 0.5 m and 0.36 m/h, respectively.
3.2. Seepage Theory. The seepage flow-control is shown in
the following equation [39]:
z zh z zh z zh zθ
􏼠kx 􏼡 + 􏼠ky 􏼡 + 􏼠kz 􏼡 + Q � , (7)
zx zx zy zy zz zz zt
where kx , ky , and kz are hydraulic conductivities along the x,
y, and z directions, respectively; i is the total hydraulic
gradient; Q is the water flowing into or out of the soil; t is the
time; and θ is the volumetric water content.
The typical seepage boundary conditions of an earth dam
can be used for landfill seepage, as shown in Figure 6. The
first one is the total head boundary (S1 and S2), that is, ϕ1 �
H1 and ϕ2 � H2 . The second one is the impervious boundary
(S3), and the flux is “0” through the boundary. The third one
is the saturated surface (S4). The position of S4 is unknown,
and the pore pressure is “0”. The last one is the free drainage
boundary (S5). The pore pressure is “0,” and it can only flow
along a downstream slope [40].
3.3. Numerical Model and Permeability Simulation.
According to Figure 5, a model was established using
ABAQUS/Standard software (Figure 7) and the parameters
for each part of the material were set in the model (Table 1).
It was assumed that the landfill volume does not change
during computing and that the permeabilities of the waste
and drainage layers change as follows. Permeability of MSW
layers distributed in depth is shown in Figure 8.
The permeability distributions in the spatial and tem-
poral domains were defined using the USDFLD subroutine
of ABAQUS software [40, 41]. The simulation steps are as
follows:
(1) The finite element model was established using
ABAQUS, and the grid was divided. The material
properties were then set, the keywords of waste or
drainage layer saturated permeability were edited,
and the field variables related to permeability were
defined.
(2) The relationships among the field variable, Y co-
ordinate, and t were defined by the USDFLD user
S4
Y S1
H1
S3
S2
H2
X
Figure 6: Typical seepage boundary conditions of an earth dam.
Y
Z
X
Figure 7: Mesh of the finite element model.
subroutine to determine the permeability distribu-
tion of a landfill in the spatial and temporal domains.
(3) The time step and initial conditions were set, and the
boundary constraint and load were applied.
(4) Variable outputs were defined for FV1 and FV2. FV1
refers to the permeability of MSW in a logarithmic
distribution in the spatial domain, and FV2 refers to
the permeability of MSW distributed logarithmically
and indexed in the spatial and temporal domains.
The calculation results exhibited the field variable
distributions, namely, the permeability distribution
(see Figures 9 and 10). The distributions of char-
acteristics in the spatial and temporal domains are
simulated in Figure 10 based on the Z-zone of the
model in Figure 9.
3.4. Calculation Scheme Design. Considering the perme-
ability distributions of the waste and drainage layers in the
spatial and temporal domains, the influence of permeability
variations on the seepage field were studied. The following
nine schemes were adopted for analysis (Table 2). The effects
of kwa and kd1 are considered in Scheme 1; the effects of kwa
and kd2 are considered in Scheme 4, and they are suitable for
seepage analysis of low landfill in the short term. Schemes 2
and 5 are suitable for seepage analysis of high landfill in the
short term. Schemes 3 and 6 are suitable for seepage analysis
of high landfill in the long term. Schemes 7, 8, and 9 are
suitable for seepage analysis of landfill in the long term, due
to drainage clogging. The mesh was the same for all of the
schemes in the models. The intensity of rainfall infiltration
was 0.02 m/h at the top of the landfill slope and was con-
verted in the slope, based on the ratio of the slope. The
rainfall pattern was the center type. The amplitude curve of
the rainfall intensity is shown in Figure 11. The initial
groundwater level was 20 m. The drainage-only flow of the
slope was set, and the variation of pore pressure was cal-
culated and analyzed.
Advances in Civil Engineering 5

Table 1: Parameters of each part of the material.

Symbol of
Material (the vertical coordinate Y) Consideration Permeability (m/h)
permeability
Layering distribution kwa 0.0021
Function distribution in the spatial domain kwb Equation (2)
W1 (20.5 m < Y ≤ 30.5 m)
Function distribution in the spatial and Equations (2) and
kwc
temporal domains (5)
Layering distribution kwa 0.017
Function distribution in the spatial domain kwb Equation (2)
W2 (31.0 m < Y ≤ 41.0 m)
Function distribution in the spatial and Equations (2) and
kwc
temporal domains (5)
Layering distribution kwa 0.18
Function distribution in the spatial domain kwb Equation (2)
W3 (41.5 m < Y ≤ 51.5 m)
Function distribution in the spatial and Equations (2) and
kwc
temporal domains (5)
A portion clogging kd1 0.00036
D (20.0 m < Y ≤ 20.5 m) No clogging kd2 0.36
Considering the clogging process kd3 Equation (6)
M (30.5 m < Y ≤ 31.0 m)
— 3.6 × 10− 4
(41.0 m < Y ≤ 41.5 m)
F (0 m < Y ≤ 20.0 m) — 3.6 × 10− 4
where kwa , kwb , and kwc are saturated permeability distributions of waste under three assumptions at moment t (m/h); kd is the saturated permeability of the
drainage layer (m/h); t is the time (h); and Y is the vertical coordinate value (m).

Y
Z
X

Figure 8: Permeability of MSW layers distributed in the spatial domain.

FV1
(Avg: 75%)
+6.312e – 01
+3.598e – 01
+2.051e – 01
+1.169e – 01
+6.661e – 02
+3.797e – 02
+2.164e – 02
+1.233e – 02
+7.030e – 03
+4.007e – 03
+2.284e – 03 Y Z
+1.302e – 03
+7.418e – 04 Z X

Figure 9: Permeability of MSW in a logarithmic distribution in the spatial domain (m/h).

4. Results and Discussion
In order to compare and analyze the results of all schemes,
several key positions are selected and analyzed in Figure 12.
The location of L1 is X � 106 m, and the coordinates of P1,
P2, P3, P4, and P5 are (51, 33), (116, 22), (116, 33), (116, 44),
and (116, 50), respectively. The seepage field was analyzed
based on the pore pressure and leachate level.
4.1. Pore Pressure. In this landfill structure, the permeability
of the waste was distributed as layers (Scheme 1) and
function (Scheme 2) in the vertical direction, and the cal-
culation results were compared and analyzed. The distri-
butions of pore pressure of L1 in both schemes are shown in
Figures 13 and 14. When pore pressure was greater than
0 kPa, leachate exists in the landfill. The leachate levels in-
cluded surface, perched, and main leachate levels. The pore
pressure varied from − 320 kPa to 280 kPa. In Scheme 1,
there were one main and two perched leachate levels in the
landfill. The shallow waste permeability had the larger
constant and the permeability of the middle layer decreased
clearly as an evident change occurred in the pore pressure at
the middle layer. Thus, visible interception of rainfall oc-
curred. In Scheme 2, there was a main and a surface leachate
level in the landfill during rainfall. Due to gradual decrease of
the waste permeability with depth, the rate of rainfall in-
filtration decreased, and the leachate level appeared in the
surface waste. A comparison shows that the pore pressures
of the waste pile (20− 40 m depth) in Scheme 2 was greater
6 Advances in Civil Engineering

FV2
(Avg: 75%)
+6.298e – 01 51.5
+3.589e – 01
+2.046e – 01
+1.166e – 01
+6.645e – 02 41.5

Depth H (m)
+3.788e – 02
+2.159e – 02
+1.230e – 02
+7.013e – 03
+3.997e – 03 31.0
+2.278e – 03
+1.298e – 03
+7.400e – 04
+5.746e – 04 20.5
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480
Waste degradation time t (h)
Figure 10: Permeability of MSW distributed logarithmically and indexed in the spatial and temporal domains, respectively (m/h).

Table 2: Calculation schemes. 50

Permeability of drainage
40
layer (m/h) The perched
Scheme

Height H (m)
leachate level
kd1 30
kd2 kd3
↓
Scheme Scheme Scheme 20
kwa ⟶ The main
1 4 7 leachate level
Permeability of MSW Scheme Scheme Scheme 10
kwb
(m/h) 2 5 8
Scheme Scheme Scheme 0
kwc –320 –220 –120 –20 80 180 280
3 6 9 Pore pressure P (kPa)
t = 1.0h t = 8.7h
1.0 t = 3.0h t = 23.5 h
t = 4.0h t = 480.0 h
0.8 t = 5.5h P = 0 kPa
Magnitude

0.6 Figure 13: Vertical distribution curve of pore pressure at L1 in

Scheme 1.
0.4

0.2 50
The surface
0.0 leachate level
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 40
Time t (h)
Height H (m)

30
Figure 11: Amplitude curve of rainfall intensity.
20 The main
P5 leachate level
P4 10
P1 P3
0
P2 –220 –170 –120 –70 –20 30 80 130 180 230
Y Pore pressure P (kPa)
L1
t = 1.0 h t = 8.6 h
X t = 3.0 h t = 25.3 h
Figure 12: Distribution graph of key positions. t = 4.0 h t = 480.0h
t = 6.0 h P = 0kPa
Figure 14: Vertical distribution curve of pore pressure at L1 in
than that in Scheme 1. Similarly, the pore pressure distri- Scheme 2.
bution in Schemes 4 and 5 was basically the same and also in
Schemes 7 and 8. Table 3 displays the pore pressure distribution in both the
The permeability of the waste was distributed as a schemes. Taking observation points from P2 to P5, it can be
constant (Scheme 2) and function (Scheme 3) in time. seen that the pore pressure of Scheme 3 is larger than that of
Advances in Civil Engineering 7

Table 3: Variation of pore pressure at P2–P5 with time in Scheme 2 and Scheme 3.
Pore pressure P (kpa)
Time t (day) Scheme 2 Scheme 3
P2 P3 P4 P5 P2 P3 P4 P5
1 − 9.12 − 8.90 − 7.75 − 24.43 − 9.09 − 8.76 − 7.74 − 24.42
3 +2.05 +0.27 − 10.98 − 27.38 +2.06 +0.06 − 10.97 − 27.35
4 − 5.90 − 26.58 − 8.94 − 25.01 − 5.87 − 26.46 − 8.86 − 24.92
6 − 38.47 − 88.15 +2.46 − 12.75 − 38.41 − 87.88 +2.72 − 12.46
10 − 56.77 − 122.17 +29.48 +15.08 − 56.70 − 121.78 +29.91 +15.52
25 − 71.75 − 145.27 +63.47 +48.33 − 71.62 − 144.86 +63.78 +48.64
480 − 91.42 − 178.54 +37.34 +20.62 − 91.35 − 178.47 +37.39 +20.67

Scheme 2. At the beginning of the rain, the pore pressure at 15

P2 and P3 are less affected by rainfall due to middle-layer 10
interception. In both the schemes, the change in trend of

Pore pressure P (kpa)

5
pore pressure is consistent; the pore pressure increases first
and then decreases gradually. Comparing the two schemes, 0
the pore pressure is slightly larger because the waste per- –5 10
Enlarged draw
meability in Scheme 3 decreases with time. ing 0
–10 –10
When the spatial distribution of the waste permeability
–15 –20
and the drainage layer clogging are considered, Figures 15
0 5 10 15 20 25
and 16 depict the pore pressure distributions at P1 and P3 at –20
the same depth over time. The pore pressure distributions in –25
Schemes 1 and 4 are basically the same during the rain, and 0 100 200 300 400 500
the same is true for Schemes 2 and 5. The pore pressure order Time t (day)
at P1 and P3 is Scheme 1 > 2 > 4 > 5. Through analysis, the Scheme 1-P1 Scheme 4-P1
permeability of drainage layer decreases and then the pore Scheme 2-P1 Scheme 5-P1
pressure of the landfill increases after drainage layer clogging
Figure 15: Variation curves of the pore pressure at P1 with time in
(such as Schemes 1 and 2). When the permeability of the
four schemes.
waste is distributed as a function in the vertical direction, the
pore pressure of the landfill is lower and it dissipates faster
(such as Schemes 2 and 5). At the point of slope P1, the 0
seepage is mainly influenced by the drainage layer. Thus, the
pore pressures of Schemes 1 and 2 are larger at the early –50 0
Pore pressure P (kpa)

–50
stage. On the contrary, the seepage is mainly influenced by
Enlarged drawing –100
the permeability distribution of waste at the point P3. Thus, –100 –150
the pore pressures of Schemes 1 and 4 are larger at the early –200
–250
stage. –150 0 5 10 15 20 25

–200
4.2. Leachate Level. At the end of the rain (t � 4 h), Fig-
ures 17 and 18 show the leachate level distributions in –250
Schemes 1 and 2. It can be seen directly that the distribution 0 100 200 300 400 500
Time t (day)
type of the waste permeability has a greater influence on
leachate level in landfills. In Scheme 1, the leachate level in Scheme 1-P3 Scheme 4-P3
the slope is higher and two perched leachate levels exist. In Scheme 2-P3 Scheme 5-P3
Scheme 2, there is only one perched leachate level in the Figure 16: Variation curves of pore pressure at P3 with time in four
slope and there is a higher surface leachate level at the top of schemes.
the landfill. This is because when considering the distri-
bution of waste permeability as layers, the permeability of
the middle layer suddenly decreases, which makes it easy to 7 > 1 > 4 > 8 > 2 > 5. The leachate levels of these schemes are
retain leachate. shown in Figure 20 (t � 25− 480 h) and Table 4 (t � 480 h). It
The distributions of leachate level L1 in several schemes can be seen that the leachate level in Scheme 7 is the highest
are shown in Figure 19 within 25 h, and the positions of the and the leachate level in Scheme 2 is the lowest. When the
leachate level are marked. When the time is 3 h, the surface permeability of the drainage layer is 0.36 m/h, the leachate is
leachate levels exist in Schemes 2, 5, and 8. Perched leachate discharged quickly. The leachate level of slope is near the
levels at 3 h exist in Schemes 1, 4, and 7. When the time is underground water level with a value of 20.048 m. When the
25 h, the leachate level order of the six schemes is Scheme time is 480 h, the permeability of the drainage layer in
8 Advances in Civil Engineering

POR
+2.200e + 02
+2.000e + 02
+1.800e + 02
+1.600e + 02
+1.400e + 02
+1.200e + 02 Leachate level
+1.000e + 02
+8.000e + 01
+6.000e + 01
+4.000e + 01
+2.000e + 01 Y
+0.000e + 00
−9.253e + 01 Z X

Figure 17: Leachate level in Scheme 1 (t � 4 h).

POR
+2.200e + 02
+2.000e + 02
+1.800e + 02
+1.600e + 02
+1.400e + 02 Leachate level
+1.200e + 02
+1.000e + 02
+8.000e + 01
+6.000e + 01
+4.000e + 01
+2.000e + 01 Y
+0.000e + 00
−1.209e + 02 Z X

Figure 18: Leachate level in Scheme 2 (t � 4 h).

50 Table 4: Leachate levels of all schemes (t � 480 h).

The surface
45 leachate level Scheme 1 2 4 5 7 8
Leachate level L (m)

Leachate level
40 24.584 24.048 20.269 20.153 24.943 24.053
(m)
35
30
The perched Scheme 7 is the least in all of the schemes and the waste
25 leachate level permeability is distributed as layers. In this case, the leachate
The main infiltration is relatively slow and eventually the leachate level
20 leachate level
is the highest. The leachate level order of the six schemes is
15
0 5 10 15 20 25 Scheme 7 > 1 > 4 > 5 > 8 > 2. In conclusion, when consider-
Time t (h) ing the distribution of waste permeability as layers, the
perched leachate level is readily produced in the landfill at
Scheme 1 Scheme 2
Scheme 4 Scheme 5
the beginning of a rain although leachate infiltration has a
Scheme 7 Scheme 8 lag. Eventually, the leachate level is relatively high. When
considering the distribution of waste permeability as a
Figure 19: Leachate level distributions of several schemes function, the surface leachate level is easily produced in the
(t � 0− 25 h).
landfill at the beginning of a rain. The leachate moves down
gradually, and eventually, a perched leachate level is
31
produced.

29 5. Conclusions
Leachate level L (m)

27 Considering the heterogeneity of landfilled waste and

drainage layer clogging, the distributions of waste perme-
25
ability in the spatial and temporal domains and the changes
23 to drainage layer permeability in the temporal domain were
The main analyzed. Then, by combining finite element software and a
21 leachate level user subroutine, a simple model of a landfill was established
and the permeability of the waste and drainage layers was
19
20 70 120 170 220 270 320 370 420 470 520 simulated. Finally, the leachate distributions and transport
Time t (h) conditions of the landfill were analyzed, and the influence of
Scheme 1 Scheme 2
the distribution of waste permeability and the degree of the
Scheme 4 Scheme 5 drainage layer clogging was discussed. The main conclusions
Scheme 7 Scheme 8 of the study are as follows:
Figure 20: Leachate level distributions of several schemes (i) The value of saturated permeability of the landfill
(t � 25− 480 h). ranged from 1.0 × 10− 4 m/s to 1.0 × 10− 9 m/s, and it
Advances in Civil Engineering
followed a logarithmic relationship vertically. The
saturated permeability of the waste distribution
curve followed an exponential relation in time. After
the landfill was worked for a few years, the drainage
layer always exhibited some form of a clogging
problem and its permeability decreased by one to
five orders of magnitude.
(ii) The simulation method of saturated permeability of
the landfill in the spatial and temporal domains was
studied. It was possible to simulate the distribution
of saturated permeability by a variety of functions,
and the results were satisfactory. In addition, this
method could be used for the consolidation of sand
drains, tailing dam siltation, and other geotechnical
engineering conditions.
(iii) At the same clogging degrees of the drainage layer,
the overall pore pressure was relatively large con-
sidering the distributions of waste permeability as
layers (vertically). An evident change occurred in
the pore pressure at the middle layer, which assisted
a perched leachate level to occur at the top of the
landfill. Considering the distributions of waste
permeability as a vertical logarithmic relationship,
the surface leachate level was produced first; then,
the leachate moved down and produced a lower
perched leachate level.
(iv) At the same clogging degrees of the drainage layer,
the variational trends were the same and the in-
fluence of the waste permeability distribution on the
pore pressure at the top of the landfill was greater
than that of the pore pressure at the bottom of the
landfill, irrespective of consideration of the poly-
nomial relation of waste permeability in time.
(v) When the distributions of waste permeability were
the same and the clogging problem occurred in the
drainage layer, the change in pore pressure over
time was essentially the same during the rain; the
pore pressure dissipation was slower and the
leachate level was higher.
In conclusion, corresponding models should be estab-
lished and analyzed based on the permeability range, waste
degradation rate, and the degree of clogging in order to make
the results converge to that of actual situations.
Data Availability
The data used to support the findings of this study are
available from the corresponding author upon request.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest
regarding the publication of this paper.
Acknowledgments
This study was financially supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51679193 and 51679197) and
9
the Special Funds for the Natural Science Foundation of
Shaanxi Province (2017JZ013). We thank LetPub (https://
www.letpub.com) for its linguistic assistance during the
preparation of this manuscript.
References
[1] B. Caicedo, E. Giraldo, and L. Yamin, “The landslide of dona
juana landfill in bogota. A case study,” in Proceedings of the
Fourth International Congress on Environmental Geotechnics
(4th ICEG), pp. 11–15, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, August 2002.
[2] R. G. Koerner and W. A. Eith, Drainage Capability of Fully
Degraded MSW with Respect to Various Leachate Collection
and Removal Systems, Geotechnical Special Publication,
Denver, CO, USA, 2005.
[3] S. M. Merry, E. Kavazanjian Jr., and W. U. Fritz, “Re-
connaissance of the july 10, 2000, payatas landfill failure,”
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, vol. 19, no. 2,
pp. 100–107, 2005.
[4] Y. Chen, X. Xu, and L. Zhan, “Analysis of solid-liquid-gas
interactions in landfilled municipal solid waste by a bio-hy-
dro-mechanical coupled model,” Science China Technological
Sciences, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 81–89, 2012.
[5] X. B. Xu, T. L. T. Zhan, Y. M. Chen, and R. P. Beaven,
“Intrinsic and relative permeabilities of shredded municipal
solid wastes from the Qizishan landfill, China,” Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 1243–1252, 2014.
[6] M. Y. Li, H. K. Jae, and Q. Y. Xu, “Review about hydraulic
conductivity of landfilled waste,” Environmental Engineering,
vol. 8, pp. 80–84, 2014.
[7] S. Gavelyte, E. Dace, and K. Baziene, “The effect of particle size
distribution on hydraulic permeability in a waste mass,”
Energy Procedia, vol. 95, pp. 140–144, 2016.
[8] Z. Zhang, Y. Wang, H. Xu, Y. Fang, and D. Wu, “Influence of
effective stress and dry density on the permeability of mu-
nicipal solid waste,” Waste Management & Research, vol. 36,
no. 5, pp. 471–450, Article ID: 734242X18763520, 2018.
[9] F. Olivier and J.-P. Gourc, “Hydro-mechanical behavior of
municipal solid waste subject to leachate recirculation in a
large-scale compression reactor cell,” Waste Management,
vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 44–58, 2007.
[10] K. R. Reddy, H. Hettiarachchi, N. Parakalla, J. Gangathulasi,
J. Bogner, and T. Lagier, “Hydraulic conductivity of MSW in
landfills,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, vol. 135,
no. 8, pp. 677–683, 2009.
[11] M. S. Hossain, K. K. Penmethsa, and L. Hoyos, “Permeability
of municipal solid waste in bioreactor landfill with degra-
dation,” Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, vol. 27,
no. 1, pp. 43–51, 2009.
[12] G. Stoltz, J.-P. Gourc, and L. Oxarango, “Liquid and gas
permeabilities of unsaturated municipal solid waste under
compression,” Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, vol. 118,
no. 1-2, pp. 27–42, 2010.
[13] H. Wu, T. Chen, H. Wang, and W. Lu, “Field air permeability
and hydraulic conductivity of landfilled municipal solid waste
in China,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 98,
pp. 15–22, 2012.
[14] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the
People’s Republic of China 2012, Technical Code for Geo-
technical Engineering of Municipal Solid Waste Sanitary
Landfill, CJJ176-2012, China Construction Industry Press,
Beijing, China, 2012.
[15] R. Yang, Z. Xu, J. Chai, Y. Qin, and Y. Li, “Permeability test
and slope stability analysis of municipal solid waste in
10 Advances in Civil Engineering

Jiangcungou Landfill, Shaanxi, China,” Journal of the Air & Proceedings of the 9th International Waste Management and
Waste Management Association, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 655–662, Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy, October 2003.
2016. [32] Y. M. Chen, J. W. Lan, Y. C. Li, L. T. Zhan, and H. Ke,
[16] R. Yang, Z. Xu, and J. Chai, “A review of characteristics of “Development and control of leachate mound in MSW
landfilled municipal solid waste in several countries: physical landfills,” Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,
composition, unit weight, and permeability coefficient,” Polish vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 154–163, 2014.
Journal of Environmental Studies, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 2425– [33] Z. G. Xu, R. Yang, and X. M. Yang, “Research on Special
2435, 2018. Geotechnical Hydraulic Conductivity—Taking Tailings Dam
[17] Z. Y. Zhang, L. F. Zhang, D. Z. Wu et al., “Experimental study and MSW Landfill as Examples, Science Press, Beijing, China,
on permeability of fresh municipal solid waste with different 2016.
mixed proportion,” Journal of Zhejiang Sci-Tech University [34] W. J. Zhang, W. A. Lin, and Y. M. Chen, “Pore pressure
(Natural Sciences), vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 796–802, 2016. monitoring and slope stability analysis of a waste landfill,”
[18] Z. Liu, “Experimental study on hydraulic conductivity of Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 29,
municipal solid waste and analysis of pumping vertical well,” no. S2, pp. 3628–3632, 2010.
M.S. thesis, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, 2010. [35] W.-J. Zhang, G.-G. Zhang, and Y.-M. Chen, “Analyses on a
[19] Z. H. Qiu, C. M. He, B. J. Zhu et al., “Investigations of water high leachate mound in a landfill of municipal solid waste in
transport in valley-type MSW landfills and their stabilities China,” Environmental Earth Sciences, vol. 70, no. 4,
pp. 1747–1752, 2013.
subjected to various rainfall patterns,” Rock and Soil Mechnics,
[36] H. J. He, “Study on leachate and landfill gas generation,
vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 3151–3170, 2012.
transportation and induced slope instability in municipal
[20] Y. X. Jie, D. Z. Danzeng, and Y. F. Wei, “Study on the per-
solid waste landfill,” Doctor’s degree thesis, Zhejiang Uni-
meability of municipal solid waste,” Geotechnical Engineering
versity, Hangzhou, China, 2012.
Technique, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 307–310, 2005.
[37] W. J. Zhang, “Experimental and numerical study on water/
[21] W. F. Wang, “Laboratory research on saturated hydraulic
leachate transport in landfill of municipal solid waste,”
conductivity of municipal solid waste under different deg- Doctor’s degree thesis, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou,
radation age,” Master’s degree thesis, Zhejiang University, China, 2007.
Hangzhou, China, 2012. [38] R. K. Rowe, M. D. Armstrong, and D. R. Cullimore, “Mass
[22] Z. Y. Zhang, Z. K. Ding, Y. F. Wang, D. Z. Wu, and loading and the rate of clogging due to municipal solid waste
Z. P. Zhang, “Experimental study on the compression and leachate,” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 37, no. 2,
permeability combined test of fresh municipal solid waste pp. 355–370, 2000.
with higher organic matter,” Chinese Journal of Rock Me- [39] C. X. Mao, Seepage Calculation Analysis and Control, China
chanics and Engineering, no. S1, pp. 3645–3651, 2018. Water Resources and Hydropower Press, Beijing, China,
[23] A. J. Cooke and R. K. Rowe, “2D modelling of clogging in 2003.
landfill leachate collection systems,” Canadian Geotechnical [40] Abaqus 6.14, User subroutines reference guide, Section 1.1.7
Journal, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 1393–1409, 2008. (1− 3), Section 1.1.32 (1− 4).
[24] S. Lozecznik and J. Van Gulck, “Full-scale laboratory study [41] K. Fei and J. W. Zhang, Abaqus Application in Geotechnical
into clogging of pipes permeated with landfill leachate,” Engineering, China Water Resources and Hydropower Press,
Practice Periodical of Hazardous Toxic & Radioactive Waste Beijing, China, 2009.
Management, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 261–269, 2009.
[25] K. Bazienė, S. Vasarevičius, and A. A. Siddiqui, “Clogging test
of landfill leachate drainage using different fillers,” Journal of
Environmental Engineering and Landscape Management,
vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 301–306, 2012.
[26] R. K. Rowe and Y. Yu, “Clogging of finger drain systems in
MSW landfills,” Waste Management, vol. 32, no. 12,
pp. 2342–2352, 2012.
[27] R. K. Rowe and Y. Yu, “Modelling of leachate characteristics
and clogging of gravel drainage mesocosms permeated with
landfill leachate,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-
environmental Engineering, vol. 139, no. 9, pp. 1022–1034,
2012.
[28] Q. Tang, F. Gu, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and J. Mo, “Impact of
biological clogging on the barrier performance of landfill
liners,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 222,
pp. 44–53, 2018.
[29] Z. Li, Q. Xue, L. Liu, and J. Li, “Precipitates in landfill leachate
mediated by dissolved organic matters,” Journal of Hazardous
Materials, vol. 287, pp. 278–286, 2015.
[30] R. M. Koerner and G. R. Koerner, Leachate Clogging As-
sessment of Geotextile (And Soil) Landfill Filters, US Envi-
ronmental Protection, Washington, DC, USA, 1995.
[31] T. Bouchez, M. L. Munoz, S. Vessigaud, C. Bordier, and
C. Aran, “Clogging of MSW landfill leachate collection sys-
tems: prediction methods and in situ diagnosis,” in
 International Journal of

Rotating Advances in
Machinery Multimedia

The Scientific
Engineering
Journal of
Journal of

Hindawi
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi
Sensors
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 http://www.hindawi.com
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
2013 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Journal of

Control Science
and Engineering

Advances in
Civil Engineering
Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

Submit your manuscripts at

www.hindawi.com

Journal of
Journal of Electrical and Computer
Robotics
Hindawi
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

VLSI Design
Advances in
OptoElectronics
International Journal of

International Journal of
Modelling &
Simulation
Aerospace
Hindawi Volume 2018
Navigation and
Observation
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
in Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Engineering
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018
Hindawi
www.hindawi.com www.hindawi.com Volume 2018

International Journal of
International Journal of Antennas and Active and Passive Advances in
Chemical Engineering Propagation Electronic Components Shock and Vibration Acoustics and Vibration
Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi Hindawi
www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018 www.hindawi.com Volume 2018